Talk:Rob Howard (politician)
Rob Howard (politician) has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: February 10, 2014. (Reviewed version). |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Rob Howard/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 03:32, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Nominator: maclean (talk)
Hi! My review for this article will be here shortly. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 03:32, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
1: Well-written
- a. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
- b. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Check for WP:LEAD:
|
Done
Check for WP:LAYOUT: Done
|
Done
Check for WP:WTW: Done
Check for WP:MOSFICT: Done
|
Done
|
Check for WP:BLP:
|
2: Verifiable with no original research
- a. Has an appropriate reference section: Yes
- b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: excellent (Thorough check on Google.)
Done
Check for WP:RS: Done
|
Done
Check for inline citations WP:MINREF: Done
|
- c. No original research: Done
Done
|
3: Broad in its coverage
a. Major aspects:
|
---|
Done
|
b. Focused:
|
---|
Done
|
4: Neutral
Done
4. Fair representation without bias: Done
|
5: Stable: No edit wars, etc: Yes
6: Images (None)
Images:
|
---|
Done
6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: Done
6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: Done
|
Maclean, I'm very happy and inspired to see your work here. I do have some insights based on the above checklist that I think will improve the article:
I think the Provincial politics in the lead can be improved in order to provide an accessible overview.
Besides that, I think the article looks excellent. All the best, --Seabuckthorn ♥ 08:18, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- Response from maclean25
- I boosted the lead as recommended [1] Let me know if you find it too detailed - there's a few details I can skim off. maclean (talk) 23:31, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks! I think it's fine now. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 02:26, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Promoting the article to GA status. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 02:26, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
- Wikipedia good articles
- Social sciences and society good articles
- Biography articles of living people
- GA-Class biography articles
- GA-Class biography (politics and government) articles
- Low-importance biography (politics and government) articles
- Politics and government work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- GA-Class Canada-related articles
- Low-importance Canada-related articles
- GA-Class British Columbia articles
- Low-importance British Columbia articles
- GA-Class Political parties and politicians in Canada articles
- Low-importance Political parties and politicians in Canada articles
- All WikiProject Canada pages